2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump

What else is new. Donald Trump is not an intelligent person and there is no intelligent reason to support him.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump

Trump is so cartoonish it is scary. It is embarrassing that people in this country are voting for him. He has no plans or ideas, all he does is play the victim, and blame others.

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump

Only a complete idiot would tell his enemy his plan. Something Obama can't seem to grasp. "Why do they know what's coming next?" Because you keep telling them the plan retard.

"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump

He's right. The military has been completely emasculated, dismantled, and handcuffed by this administration. Our military has given up. They have no leadership and what they do have isn't listened to so they've given up as well.

"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump

Every "negative" you've mentioned, Hillary is that quality times a thousand. Liberal blinders off. Push the common sense button. Reboot.

"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them, and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them

I never said that. lol I don't think you're capable of producing an argument without resorting to hyperbole.

and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

The majority of active members in the politics section of these forums are trump supporters - yourself included. You've enumerated and explained the reasons for your support ad nauseam ... trump surrogates on television have defended their candidate and his merits (or at least their perception thereof) ... they have defended his contradictions, lies, and evasions. The sentiments that are motivating them, their sincerity, and the intellectual rigor of their reasoning are all manifest.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them, and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

This is unrelated, but do you actually credit donald trump with opposing the iraq war from the beginning? -- like, do you actually think he independently developed the insight that the invasion would destabilize the middle east, and opposed it ab initio .... or that he supported it when everyone else did, and then opposed it when it became popular to oppose it?

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them

I never said that. lol I don't think you're capable of producing an argument without resorting to hyperbole.

I don't think you're capable of producing a post without snark

and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

The majority of active members in the politics section of these forums are trump supporters - yourself included. You've enumerated and explained the reasons for your support ad nauseam ... trump surrogates on television have defended their candidate and his merits (or at least their perception thereof) ... they have defended his contradictions, lies, and evasions. The sentiments that are motivating them, their sincerity, and the intellectual rigor of their reasoning are all manifest.

Then you should know that most supporters, myself included, can articulate what Trump stands for and why we support it.

Why do you think he won the Republican primary? I'm honestly curious what you think. There are three issues that the population has been fuming about for a long time. Disastrous trade deals and the deindustrialization of the country, endless and unwinnable foreign wars, and replacement level immigration. Trump was the only person to tap into all of these sentiments.

And I would actually agree with much of what you say. Donald Trump is legitimately ridiculous. The thing is, he is far less ridiculous than our political status quo (think invade the world, invite the world), which is pure insanity.

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them, and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

This is unrelated, but do you actually credit donald trump with opposing the iraq war from the beginning? -- like, do you actually think he independently developed the insight that the invasion would destabilize the middle east, and opposed it ab initio .... or that he supported it when everyone else did, and then opposed it when it became popular to oppose it?

Fact Check has a good article on this. There's no evidence that he opposed the war before it started, but he claims he did and it's possible that nobody asked him about it or he simply kept quiet. He did indicate support for the war six months before the invasion, when the war propaganda was at its height.

The day after the war, he said that it was going well from a military standpoint (an objective fact). Five days after the war, apparently something went wrong that day and he said it would be a mess if they continued down that road. A few months later, he said that he wished the money being spent in Iraq could be spent here. Then he said that we shouldn't have fought in Iraq on September 11th 2003, when around 60-75% of the population supported the war (http://www.gallup.com...).

What we have here is an uninformed civilian who quickly came to the correct decision. Hillary Clinton was a heavily informed politician and still came to the wrong decision, and didn't learn from her mistake. She destabilized Libya years later for absolutely no reason.

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them, and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

This is unrelated, but do you actually credit donald trump with opposing the iraq war from the beginning? -- like, do you actually think he independently developed the insight that the invasion would destabilize the middle east, and opposed it ab initio .... or that he supported it when everyone else did, and then opposed it when it became popular to oppose it?

Fact Check has a good article on this. There's no evidence that he opposed the war before it started, but he claims he did and it's possible that nobody asked him about it or he simply kept quiet. He did indicate support for the war six months before the invasion, when the war propaganda was at its height.

The day after the war, he said that it was going well from a military standpoint (an objective fact). Five days after the war, apparently something went wrong that day and he said it would be a mess if they continued down that road. A few months later, he said that he wished the money being spent in Iraq could be spent here. Then he said that we shouldn't have fought in Iraq on September 11th 2003, when around 60-75% of the population supported the war (http://www.gallup.com...).

What we have here is an uninformed civilian who quickly came to the correct decision. Hillary Clinton was a heavily informed politician and still came to the wrong decision, and didn't learn from her mistake. She destabilized Libya years later for absolutely no reason.

*First, I appreciate that you're sticking to objective facts (albeit the details are a bit off -- as I shall demonstrate) - most trump supporters don't do this

The iraq war began in march 2003 -- I don't know what that sept. 11, 2003 date is in reference to, but obviously it's not when trump came to the realization that the war was a bad idea.

The esquire article (literally the only record of him expressing clear opposition to the war) was published in August 2004. According to your source, 48% of the public thought the war was a mistake by that point - opposition was trending.

You're vilifying hillary clinton ... but she has recognized that the war was a mistake and acknowledged that she was indeed on the wrong side of the issue. Trump was no more insightful than clinton, he supported the war too and did not publicly change his mind until doing so became fashionable, ... but now he's lying and claiming that he opposed it from the beginning.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them, and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

This is unrelated, but do you actually credit donald trump with opposing the iraq war from the beginning? -- like, do you actually think he independently developed the insight that the invasion would destabilize the middle east, and opposed it ab initio .... or that he supported it when everyone else did, and then opposed it when it became popular to oppose it?

Fact Check has a good article on this. There's no evidence that he opposed the war before it started, but he claims he did and it's possible that nobody asked him about it or he simply kept quiet. He did indicate support for the war six months before the invasion, when the war propaganda was at its height.

The day after the war, he said that it was going well from a military standpoint (an objective fact). Five days after the war, apparently something went wrong that day and he said it would be a mess if they continued down that road. A few months later, he said that he wished the money being spent in Iraq could be spent here. Then he said that we shouldn't have fought in Iraq on September 11th 2003, when around 60-75% of the population supported the war (http://www.gallup.com...).

What we have here is an uninformed civilian who quickly came to the correct decision. Hillary Clinton was a heavily informed politician and still came to the wrong decision, and didn't learn from her mistake. She destabilized Libya years later for absolutely no reason.

*First, I appreciate that you're sticking to objective facts (albeit the details are a bit off -- as I shall demonstrate) - most trump supporters don't do this

The iraq war began in march 2003 -- I don't know what that sept. 11, 2003 date is in reference to, but obviously it's not when trump came to the realization that the war was a bad idea.

The esquire article (literally the only record of him expressing clear opposition to the war) was published in August 2004. According to your source, 48% of the public thought the war was a mistake by that point - opposition was trending.

I don't think this is true...according to the factcheck article, he started complaining about it in September of 2003

You're vilifying hillary clinton ... but she has recognized that the war was a mistake and acknowledged that she was indeed on the wrong side of the issue. Trump was no more insightful than clinton, he supported the war too and did not publicly change his mind until doing so became fashionable, ... but now he's lying and claiming that he opposed it from the beginning.

But it was Hillary's *job* to be more insightful than Trump. She had all of the information, and all he had was the war propaganda and a public image to manage. And at the end of the day, she did not learn from her mistake as she destabilized Libya and is far more Hawkish than Trump on Syria. She has consistently been a hawk. If you're voting for her, you have to own the fact that you are voting for George Bush's foreign policy, which killed between 500,000 and 1,000,000 people for no reason at all.

At most, he expressed lukewarm support (literally saying "I guess so") and then immediately did nothing but express concern about the war and lament the money that could've been spent better here. Factcheck notes "If Trump did support the war, he turned on it quickly."

It's a lot easier to just say he was against it

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"Let"s not mince words: Moscow perceives the former secretary of state as an existential threat. The Russian foreign-policy experts I consulted did not harbor even grudging respect for Clinton. The most damaging chapter of her tenure was the NATO intervention in Libya, which Russia could have prevented with its veto in the U.N. Security Council. Moscow allowed the mission to go forward only because Clinton had promised that a no-fly zone would not be used as cover for regime change.

Russia"s leaders were understandably furious when, not only was former Libyan President Muammar al-Qaddafi ousted, but a cellphone recording of his last moments showed U.S.-backed rebels sodomizing him with a bayonet. They were even more enraged by Clinton"s videotaped response to the same news: "We came, we saw, he died," the secretary of state quipped before bursting into laughter, cementing her reputation in Moscow as a duplicitous warmonger."

At 9/9/2016 2:03:49 AM, 000ike wrote:Of course, none of this would be quite so frustrating if Trump stood for something ... and his supporters could identify what he stands for and their reasons for supporting it. Self-contradiction and prevarication on the scale that trump displays should be disqualifying under any circumstances... but people just follow him compulsively

Who would have thought that members of homo sapiens sapiens - the species that mastered all others, leveled forests, erected steel giants, and propelled itself to the moon - could achieve a kind of rank stupidity that would be shameful among chickens.

Have you ever met a Trump supporter?

Not that I know of.

But you know everything about them

I never said that. lol I don't think you're capable of producing an argument without resorting to hyperbole.

I don't think you're capable of producing a post without snark

and their (lack of) reasons for supporting Trump

The majority of active members in the politics section of these forums are trump supporters - yourself included. You've enumerated and explained the reasons for your support ad nauseam ... trump surrogates on television have defended their candidate and his merits (or at least their perception thereof) ... they have defended his contradictions, lies, and evasions. The sentiments that are motivating them, their sincerity, and the intellectual rigor of their reasoning are all manifest.

Then you should know that most supporters, myself included, can articulate what Trump stands for and why we support it.

Why do you think he won the Republican primary? I'm honestly curious what you think. There are three issues that the population has been fuming about for a long time. Disastrous trade deals and the deindustrialization of the country, endless and unwinnable foreign wars, and replacement level immigration. Trump was the only person to tap into all of these sentiments.

And I would actually agree with much of what you say. Donald Trump is legitimately ridiculous. The thing is, he is far less ridiculous than our political status quo (think invade the world, invite the world), which is pure insanity.

If you agree that trump is objectively ridiculous then you're not like most trump supporters ... and you're not like trump surrogates. Take note of that -- you're an anomaly. In fact, your response to my iraq war question is also atypical for trump supporters. Do you realize that?

You asked me why I think trump won the primary. I believe your analysis is correct (frankly, it's been repeated millions of times at this point) -- there is a certain cohort of white, blue collar americans who feel left out -- but I suspect that these people constitute only a plurality of trump's coalition. Among trump supporters are traditional conservatives who may be staunch partisans, rightwing extremists, people who are suspicious of immigrants and dislike muslims, among others. I say that people cannot articulate a coherent reason for supporting trump because he's prevaricated on every position ... and he literally just fabricates other claims. Many of his prescriptions are impossible to execute or just plain facile and ill-conceived. Just recently he seemed to be under the impression that he could just appoint new generals upon securing the presidency. He says he has a plan to stop ISIS - a SECRET plan - and then later he says he will convene a panel of generals and advisers to concoct a plan. You are literally voting for NOTHING. Trump is NOTHING. He changes his message depending on his audience.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

At 9/9/2016 3:49:00 AM, 000ike wrote:Just recently he seemed to be under the impression that he could just appoint new generals upon securing the presidency.

I think he's talking about the generals that Obama ousted

He says he has a plan to stop ISIS - a SECRET plan - and then later he says he will convene a panel of generals and advisers to concoct a plan. You are literally voting for NOTHING. Trump is NOTHING. He changes his message depending on his audience.

I really don't think this is that silly. He said that he has a plan, and that he will consult his advisors about how to go forward and take a look at what they think should happen. I think it's a good idea to keep the plan a secret. I never thought about it before, but how does it make sense to reveal what we're doing far before we do? Wasn't the leadup to the Iraq war like a year? We certainly didn't behave this way when we had real enemies to fight.

Honestly to me the fact that we broadcast our intentions signals to me that these are phony, proxy wars. Part of our international chess match, not anything that actually benefits the home front. I am not interested in playing games with untold amounts of blood and treasure

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

Trump did the same thing (i.e. claiming credit for positions he did not hold ... and at times that he obviously did not hold them) with the decision to pull out of Iraq:

Trump 2007:"How do they get out? You know how they get out? They get out. That's how they get out. Declare victory and leave. Because, I'll tell you, this country is just going to get further bogged down. They're in a civil war over there, Wolf. There's nothing that we're going to be able to do with a civil war."

Trump 2016:"It's the fault of Obama"there is no question. It's the fault of Bush for going in. It's the fault of Obama for getting out. It's a disaster"the war should have never happened. And then once it did happen, you should have at least left the troops in. So it's really a double fault."

What about this?

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

I really don't think this is that silly. He said that he has a plan, and that he will consult his advisors about how to go forward and take a look at what they think should happen. I think it's a good idea to keep the plan a secret. I never thought about it before, but how does it make sense to reveal what we're doing far before we do? Wasn't the leadup to the Iraq war like a year? We certainly didn't behave this way when we had real enemies to fight.

It is objectively ridiculous. If Obama said something like that, you wouldn't be defending it. You can't request that someone vote for you on the basis of secret plans ... that is LITERALLY voting for nothing.

One of the things I find most frustrating about this is the double standard. Donald Trump is the anointed one - he is the only politician who is allowed to say things like this, and people will actually rationalize and defend it. It isn't fair.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

Trump did the same thing (i.e. claiming credit for positions he did not hold ... and at times that he obviously did not hold them) with the decision to pull out of Iraq:

Trump 2007:"How do they get out? You know how they get out? They get out. That's how they get out. Declare victory and leave. Because, I'll tell you, this country is just going to get further bogged down. They're in a civil war over there, Wolf. There's nothing that we're going to be able to do with a civil war."

Trump 2016:"It's the fault of Obama"there is no question. It's the fault of Bush for going in. It's the fault of Obama for getting out. It's a disaster"the war should have never happened. And then once it did happen, you should have at least left the troops in. So it's really a double fault."

What about this?

I think Trump's 2016 analysis is correct.

You're judging Trump for statements he made years ago as if he were a politician, when he just wasn't. He was a civilian parroting the majority opinion of the anti-war faction, public pressure that Obama and Clinton (as secretary of state) buckled under even though it was obviously bad policy.

Clinton on the other hand has had consistently bad policies as a politician who ought to know better. She has threatened war with Russia, and Russia takes the threat seriously. Worse, since she's a democrat she shuts up the strongest anti-war factions in America. As the Foreign Policy article notes:

"Another factor that disturbs Russian analysts is the fact that, unlike prior hawks such as John McCain, Clinton is a Democrat. This has allowed her to mute the West"s normal anti-interventionist voices, even as Iraq-war architect Robert Kagan boasts that Clinton will pursue a neocon foreign policy by another name. Currently, the only voice for rapprochement with Russia is Clinton"s opponent, Donald Trump. If she vanquishes him, she will have a free hand to take the aggressive action against Russia that Republican hawks have traditionally favored."

Clinton is the war candidate.

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

I really don't think this is that silly. He said that he has a plan, and that he will consult his advisors about how to go forward and take a look at what they think should happen. I think it's a good idea to keep the plan a secret. I never thought about it before, but how does it make sense to reveal what we're doing far before we do? Wasn't the leadup to the Iraq war like a year? We certainly didn't behave this way when we had real enemies to fight.

It is objectively ridiculous. If Obama said something like that, you wouldn't be defending it. You can't request that someone vote for you on the basis of secret plans ... that is LITERALLY voting for nothing.

One of the things I find most frustrating about this is the double standard. Donald Trump is the anointed one - he is the only politician who is allowed to say things like this, and people will actually rationalize and defend it. It isn't fair.

It's possible that I would criticize Obama for saying that same thing, but I'm not sure. The logic is actually pretty sound.

It's not like Trump has said nothing about Syria. He's made it clear that he wants to stop ISIS from spreading and that he's willing to work with Russia to do so--rather than the status quo where we help ISIS by funding "rebels" who we know nothing about. He just isn't going to say "Yes, I'm going to give airstrikes on these five cities the day I enter office"

But before getting all huffy about people defending Trump more than they would an ordinary politician, consider what he's done. He's taken issues that people were seething in resentment about and brought them to public debate for the first time in decades. He shifted the overton window in a BIG way. We are now talking about significantly limiting legal immigration, about ideological/religious tests for immigrants, about a nonideological, realist foreign policy, and about stopping to endless trade deals that suck our jobs away. He's destroying the neoliberal consensus that itself destroyed much of the working class.

When you have a leader who is fighting for you after decades of ruin, he begins to take on heroic qualities. To me, Trump is a hero. A flawed hero, but he's the only one we have. And I'm definitely not the only person who sees it this way

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

Trump did the same thing (i.e. claiming credit for positions he did not hold ... and at times that he obviously did not hold them) with the decision to pull out of Iraq:

Trump 2007:"How do they get out? You know how they get out? They get out. That's how they get out. Declare victory and leave. Because, I'll tell you, this country is just going to get further bogged down. They're in a civil war over there, Wolf. There's nothing that we're going to be able to do with a civil war."

Trump 2016:"It's the fault of Obama"there is no question. It's the fault of Bush for going in. It's the fault of Obama for getting out. It's a disaster"the war should have never happened. And then once it did happen, you should have at least left the troops in. So it's really a double fault."

What about this?

I think Trump's 2016 analysis is correct.

You're judging Trump for statements he made years ago as if he were a politician, when he just wasn't. He was a civilian parroting the majority opinion of the anti-war faction, public pressure that Obama and Clinton (as secretary of state) buckled under even though it was obviously bad policy.

Please stop shifting the goal posts (lol now you're really starting sound like a normal trump supporter). I would have no cause to cite trump's comments nine years ago if he did not purport to have some superior insight about the consequences of a full withdrawal. He's basically marketing his instincts and arguing that he's been on the right side of all of these policy questions -- the evidence does not substantiate, and in fact, refutes that notion.

You shifted the goal posts in the sense that you're claiming that I should not judge the wisdom or insight of his comments in and of themselves while he was a private citizen, when in fact what we're judging is the validity of the narrative he's forwarding about himself, and the consistency of his positions.

"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault

Trump did the same thing (i.e. claiming credit for positions he did not hold ... and at times that he obviously did not hold them) with the decision to pull out of Iraq:

Trump 2007:"How do they get out? You know how they get out? They get out. That's how they get out. Declare victory and leave. Because, I'll tell you, this country is just going to get further bogged down. They're in a civil war over there, Wolf. There's nothing that we're going to be able to do with a civil war."

Trump 2016:"It's the fault of Obama"there is no question. It's the fault of Bush for going in. It's the fault of Obama for getting out. It's a disaster"the war should have never happened. And then once it did happen, you should have at least left the troops in. So it's really a double fault."

What about this?

I think Trump's 2016 analysis is correct.

You're judging Trump for statements he made years ago as if he were a politician, when he just wasn't. He was a civilian parroting the majority opinion of the anti-war faction, public pressure that Obama and Clinton (as secretary of state) buckled under even though it was obviously bad policy.

Please stop shifting the goal posts (lol now you're really starting sound like a normal trump supporter). I would have no cause to cite trump's comments nine years ago if he did not purport to have some superior insight about the consequences of a full withdrawal. He's basically marketing his instincts and arguing that he's been on the right side of all of these policy questions -- the evidence does not substantiate, and in fact, refutes that notion.

You shifted the goal posts in the sense that you're claiming that I should not judge the wisdom or insight of his comments in and of themselves while he was a private citizen, when in fact what we're judging is the validity of the narrative he's forwarding about himself, and the consistency of his positions.

You asked if he opposed the Iraq war early on and we went through the evidence. He expressed skepticism about the cost almost immediately and never endorsed the war...you didn't ask anything about his "plan" for withdraw. Has Trump bragged about telling them not to withdraw from Iraq?

Obama and Clinton have to be two of the people in the world who know the most about the military situation in that region, and they still made the horrible decision to fully withdraw due to public pressure. When it comes to Iraq, the proper thing to do would be to leave it alone. If you do invade you have to stay behind for years instead of living in a fantasyland where they can sustain a democracy. Trump has a mixed record on his Iraq statements as he opposed the war but also wanted to withdraw.

The difference is that he now realizes that policy was a mistake, and the far more important difference is that he's railing against these stupid f*cking neocon wars that have killed so many people and cost so much money. That's far more than can be said about his opponent.

What do you think about Clinton wanting to pursue neocon policy?

DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump ::

Maybe it's because he has never been a lying politician before and he needs to learn how to lie a little better to convince the public he knows something. Hillary Clinton is very poor at lying because everyone knows she's a liar.

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump ::

Maybe it's because he has never been a lying politician before and he needs to learn how to lie a little better to convince the public he knows something. Hillary Clinton is very poor at lying because everyone knows she's a liar.

At 9/9/2016 12:45:22 AM, slo1 wrote:1. Says he knows about ISIS more than the generals do.

2. When asked if he really knows of ISIS more than the generals do he indicates they are inept since they have not yet defeated ISIS.

3. Says he has a guarenteed secret plan to defeat ISIS, but won't tell anyone what it is.

4. Most resently he now says he would ask the generals to put together a 30 day plan to defeat ISIS.

There really are only two explinations of this very odd behavior, contradictions, and blatently exposing lies (that he had his own secret plan to defeat ISIS).

A. He has some severe memory issues.

B. He doesn't have solid convictions and tends to absorb and take on the opinions of those he is currently speaking to.

C. I believe the timing between 3 and 4 he started getting security debriefs andsuddenly realized he don't know anything that he thought he did. This would indicate he is over confident and does not have realistic expectations of his knowledge or capability.

It is a very complexing progression of statements by Trump ::

Maybe it's because he has never been a lying politician before and he needs to learn how to lie a little better to convince the public he knows something. Hillary Clinton is very poor at lying because everyone knows she's a liar.